Re: Release Engineering Status Report

Mike Silbersack wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Scott Long wrote:
> 
> 
>>Patches have been floated on the mailing list that revert PAE in its
>>various stages.  Maybe those need to be brought back up.  Silby?  Tor?
>>
>>Scott
> 
> 
> I believe that Tor's commit on August 30th resolved the PAE-related
> problems, so there is no need for a reversion.  Since that time, I've seen
> three panics posted:
> 
> 1.  Some netinet/ related panic which I couldn't make heads or tails of,
> and I haven't any followup reports from the poster.
> 
> 2.  Maxim's buildworld -j64 memory kmap entry exhaustion panic, which can
> be fixed by increasing the number of kmap entries.  (Tor has a patch for
> this, I will probably commit it soon.)
> 
> 3.  A panic caused by sending 64K-1 ping packets, which I can't reproduce.
> 
> (There's also a small problem with if_xl on pentium-1 machines, but since
> it's my fault and I'm waiting on test results from a guy, we won't talk
> about it.)
> 
> (Hey, anyone have a pentium-200 and a 3com 905B card?  Contact me, further
> testing can't hurt.)
> 
> So, as far as I can tell, there are no remaining problems related to PAE;
> I believe that most people are venting frustration that built up between
> August 9th and 30th.
> 
> Mike "Silby" Silbersack
> 

Ok, thanks for the update.  Since it is 17 days after Aug 30 and people
are still upset, the status was very unclear to the Release Engineering
Team.  So I guess we ened to solicit updates from the people who were
directly experiencing problems, and ask for everyone else to test it as
much as possible.

Scott